This machine allows anyone to work for minimum wage for as long as they like. Turning the crank on the side releases one penny every 4.97 seconds, for a total of $7.25 per hour. This corresponds to minimum wage for a person in New York.

This piece is brilliant on multiple levels, particularly as social commentary. Without a doubt, most people who started operating the machine for fun would quickly grow disheartened and stop when realizing just how little they’re earning by turning this mindless crank. A person would then conceivably realize that this is what nearly two million people in the United States do every day…at much harder jobs than turning a crank. This turns the piece into a simple, yet effective argument for raising the minimum wage.

Reference:

The average worker earning minimum wage must work 130+ hours to afford rent in New York and California.

If they can't afford to live in new york or cali on minimum wage then move somewhere where they can. At that point you take away the supply of workers thus raising the demand and increasing wages to be competetive. Minimum wage should be $0. If a citizen of the US is of the appropriate age and willing to take a job then there is no reason to raise it. Minimum wage is a starting point. Honestly if you don't bring anything to the table that makes you more valuable to the company and aren't getting raises look in the f'ing mirror.

Just because you and me would have a tough time to live on that much money doesn't mean it isn't possible. 40 hours a week at minimum wage would result in a take home pay of around a grand a month. Sure that aint crap but it is doable. You will also get most if not all of your income tax paid back when you file your taxes. Find a room in a shared house with others or live at home with your parents, ride a bicycle, have a prepaid cell phone that you only use for emergencies and important calls, don't text or surf the net on your phone, don't have internet at home, don't have a car(and insurance), buy clothes at the goodwill or second hand store, don't have cable tv, buy cheap food, etc... Basically you get no luxuries. Basically you would have to live on only what you need. There is a big difference between need and want. Also, don't have kids. Or here is an idea. If you want to be able to afford nicer things or to have money to spend on activities get a second job. Honestly if you can't find a job paying higher than minimum wage or can't move up you have next to zero skills, have no motivation and you don't deserve to make a single penny more than the going rate for that work.

So lame. It's a fact that there are people out there that are unemployed because of minimum wage. These people would be happy to have a job that pays them less than minimum wage, but the government tells them, "No, you are not allowed. Instead, you must be unemployed." Thanks government!

We don't live in a free market country. So singling out minimum wage and saying that people at the lowest end of the totem pole should set the shining example of a free market is laughable. We live in a complex economy with lots of unintended and secretly intended consequences of our policy.

- When are you going to demand that the govt stop paying your for your HI by excusing some of your taxes when you buy it?

- When are you going to demand the govt stop paying for part of your pensions by excusing some of your taxes when you save. Or all of them when your employer contributes to your 401K?

- When are you going to complain when the govt destroys your ability to get a fair return on your money by giving banks zero interest loans? (OK, some do) As a side note think about this when you want to take away retire's SS. You took away a reasonable return on a safe investment after forcing them to contribute to an after tax welfare system.

- You complain when the fed prints money expanding the money supply and replenishing the economy; but when are you going to complain when the govt allows corps to ship American dollars overseas without any obligation to ensure that net flow is zero. Or is the intention to let the economy run dry? Because the Constitution gives the govt the power to protect the general welfare of the nation and letting the economy dry up is essential to the welfare.

- When are you going to demand a free market where anyone can provide any goods or services without the govt allowing professional organizations to dictate qualifications? If I want Joe Blow on the street corner to pull a bad tooth then so be it. Isn't that pretty close to the way it was when the Constitution was written?

- When are you going to complain about the Govt giving its tax revenue as charity to your Jesus Country Clubs?

When the govt does so many things and provides charity to those who falsely believe they aren't getting it, it also makes life harder for those who have the least ability to get by. Shaking your pitchforks at the minimum wage is misguided.

Not gonna happen David. The govt and many large Corp have defined benefit pension plans that depend on the market. You can darn well bet the govt will do everything in it's power to prop it up. And too many people want too much of the charity above.

Who works for minimum wage? Non-documented construction laborers start at $12 an hour in Houston. If you are american and speak english well you are looking at $16. You can't even pick-up a day laborer for less than $10 and that is tax-free cash. The home depot I was in this morning was offerring temporary holiday positions at $9.

I don't know anywhere that minimum wage is actually paid except for maybe high-school workers. Heck, I worked in high school at local tumbling gym as a spotter for more than minimum wage.

To believe that the masses are working for minimum wage anywhere is ridiculous.

I don't think minimum wage was ever intended for an adult to live off of alone. I lived off of $8 an hour while I was in school, that was paying for an apartment, food, car insurance, cell phone, ect. I had a roommate and we split the bills of the apartments andh\ we got by. Could we have got by on 7.25 or whatever yes we could have. Might have had to trade eating out for cooking at home a bit more but it can be done. Regardless of that though the only people that should be making minimum wage are high school kids. It is starting point in life and if you are married with a family and still stuck at the starting line then you need to do some self evaluating

Exactly, and that's why teen unemployment is at ridiculous levels. It's also a big factor in why people just above high school level can't get a decent wage. In the old days, they used to be able to work as teenagers and pick up some work experience and, possibly, even a skill that would make them more valuable in their second job. But no. The government knows best, so they create unemployment for these teenagers and the teenagers end up entering the "real" workforce with little to offer after high school.

Exactly, and that's why teen unemployment is at ridiculous levels. It's also a big factor in why people just above high school level can't get a decent wage. In the old days, they used to be able to work as teenagers and pick up some work experience and, possibly, even a skill that would make them more valuable in their second job. But no. The government knows best, so they create unemployment for these teenagers and the teenagers end up entering the "real" workforce with little to offer after high school.

Also, skiboarder brought up another problem. We have a bunch of illegal workers taking low paying jobs from the young and unskilled. Get rid of those illegal workers and we just added a ton of starting manual labor jobs for young people to obtain.

Nick, no offense but why does everybody deserve to have their own apartment? I am sure that is what they are talking about there. Who said you have to live alone? You can find roommates or live at home. There are so many ways to live cheap if someone actually wants to do it.

Like someone else mentioned minimum wage was never designed to be a wage a family can live off. If you can't make more than minimum wage you obviously don't deserve to because you bring absolutely nothing to the table other than a pulse.

Who said you have to live alone? You can find roommates or live at home. There are so many ways to live cheap if someone actually wants to do it.

The graph above is for two bedroom apartments, so lets assume two people go in on a place together.... still means that in a vast majority of states, our combined 40 hour weeks (80 total) still won't even pay rent.... let alone food, bills, clothing, etc etc etc.

I'll make the argument that a vast majority of people don't have a "home" to go back to (I'm assuming you mean with someone's parents).

....I'm not trying to defend raising minimum wage or anything, I'm just saying that at its current state, if you're making minimum wage and aren't still in some from of school, you better be getting another job or two. Just a simple fact, I don't think anyone will disagree with that.

Quote:

If you can't make more than minimum wage you obviously don't deserve to because you bring absolutely nothing to the table other than a pulse.

I totally agree. There are plenty of jobs out there that will pay the bills and allow someone to live it is just a matter of having someone take the initiative to get it, and/or be willing to actually have to work for their money.... not just standing around.

My fiance's, sister's boyfriend (still with me?) graduated a year ago this almost to the day, he has two degrees - Business Admin / Econ..... currently working for $9.00 + commission (selling tickets for the Vikings), honestly, no clue how he is doing it. He lives in Cottage Grove so his rent is much less than mine being downtown Minneapolis, but it is crazy for me to imagine living on that when there are days I feel poor making substantially more than that.

still means that in a vast majority of states, our combined 40 hour weeks (80 total) still won't even pay rent

It cracks me up when people feel like they have some sort of right to live in expensive states like California and New York. You don't have a right to buy the most expensive car, clothes or food, so what makes you think you have a right to live in the most expensive states?

My first job was a paper route and I made way less than minimum wage and I was soooo happy to do it. Not only that, but it helped prepare me for my first "real" job at a bike shop when I was 14. It was for minimum wage (minimum wage was not as ridiculously far from the market wage back then), but I would have done it for much less.

By the time I was 18, I could fix any problem with any bicycle in the world, I could to parts stocking, sales and deliveries for an auto parts store and I was a certified smog inspector and auto mechanic. You can't show me a kid today that is starting out their life with those kinds of skills because they can't get jobs anymore that involve training because it's not worth it for the employer. Thanks for the help government!

The map shows that in Texas you need 88 hours a week to afford a 2 bedroom apartment. at 7.25 and hour x 40 hrs for a work week that is = $290. Then an extra 48 hours of work yields time and a half OT so that would be 48 hrs x 10.87 hr = 521.76. So you will be making 812 a week, times that by 4 weeks in a month and you get 3,247 bucks, now we will deduct 25% for taxes and end up with 2435 a month. I do not know of an apartment ANYWHERE in texas that charges that much. I am sure they exist in down town areas but of the two apartment i was in the ghetto one was $630 a month for a two bedroom in Houston and the nicer one was $950 a month for a two bedroom in Lewisville.

Even if the 88 hours was split between 3 jobs so no OT was earned it is still 2,552 before taxes. That is one stupid expensive apt. Now if the person only works a normal 40 hour week they earn 1160 a month before taxes. If they gain a roomate they can afford the 2 bedroom apt I had in Houston at 630 a month. This map is BS

The map shows that in Texas you need 88 hours a week to afford a 2 bedroom apartment. at 7.25 and hour x 40 hrs for a work week that is = $290. Then an extra 48 hours of work yields time and a half OT so that would be 48 hrs x 10.87 hr = 521.76. So you will be making 812 a week, times that by 4 weeks in a month and you get 3,247 bucks, now we will deduct 25% for taxes and end up with 2435 a month

The math makes perfect sense, but you're assuming that someone is capable (not to mention willing which is by far more of the stretch here) to work 52% of their week, awake, asleep, everything, 52%. If the person doesn't need sleep, a commute, to eat, to ****, to shower, to take care of a kid/brother/mother/etc..... than yeah, that is pretty easy to make enough, but lets face it, not the way things work.

Quote:

This map is BS

I think the map is skewed by the fact it is "AVERAGE" rent.... they're taking the section8 dumps in with the $10,000/mo. super luxury high raise condos.... which obviously someone working min wage wouldn't even look at.

1. most anyone working minimum wage also qualifies for all kinds of extra bene's from the govermnent: food stamps, rent subsidies, education grants, etc.
2. At that tax rate, you will at a minimum get ALL your taxes back, and in many cases, EIC which means you get back more than you paid in.
3. If "minimum wage" were turned into a "liveable wage" as suggested here, why would anyone need to better themselves by learning a trade, getting an education, or improving their situation on their own? If you could make $15-$20/hr effing up orders at the register at McD's, why do anything else? (except if McD's had to pay you $15-$20/hr, you wouldn't be able to afford to eat there, since they would simply increase their prices... and you'd be right back to square one.
4. to expand point 3. if everyone made at least $15/hr or $50/hr or whatever you think is "fair" do you not think that the price of rent would just go up right along w/the increase in people's income?

minimum wage is just that... a MINIMUM. it's a safety net so people don't get taken TOO much advantage of. it's not meant to support an entire family in a comfy 3 br apartment on the upper east side. If you want to make more you can!

also, has no one ever heard of the word "roommate"? But i guess that's not fair.

So lame. It's a fact that there are people out there that are unemployed because of minimum wage. These people would be happy to have a job that pays them less than minimum wage, but the government tells them, "No, you are not allowed. Instead, you must be unemployed." Thanks government!

That is as much fact as me saying that we could create twice the jobs we currently have by cutting everyone's pay in half. There is nothing to suggest that is true except the semantics you are trying to argue. If I want to pay a kid 4.00 an hour to clean up my yard a few hours a week, what's going to stop me?

The government knows that raising minimum wage is just a wash. As wages go up, so does the cost of goods and services. Working x number of hours with a universal increase in wages, buys you the same amount as before the wages went up. The only difference, is government gets more money......

I to find it interesting that some of the lowest income people choose to live in some of the highest cost areas. My neighbor rents his house Said that his tenant told him There's no way he could afford to send his four children to high-quality private schools But he could afford to pay higher rents in an area where the schools were better. And I guess for these people it is a win-win situation I mean the only downside is your pain way more for rent if you wanted to or could afford But the upside is you live in a much nicer neighborhood and your children are now going to a much better school I guess that kind of explains why some times you have two or three families living in a small house In a nice hood

If I want to pay a kid 4.00 an hour to clean up my yard a few hours a week, what's going to stop me?

Nothing (other than the fact that it's illegal), but if you run a coffee shop and you want to pay a kid $4 an hour to sweep the floors, not only will you be breaking the law, but now your business is at risk and it's not worth it. I want to hire a kid, kid wants to work, but government says neither can do so. Again, thanks government!

Nothing (other than the fact that it's illegal), but if you run a coffee shop and you want to pay a kid $4 an hour to sweep the floors, not only will you be breaking the law, but now your business is at risk and it's not worth it. I want to hire a kid, kid wants to work, but government says neither can do so. Again, thanks government!

It happens all of the time David. Homeless people regularly sweep floors at convenience stores for 10.00 and a cold beer. Kids mow lawns all of the time (here in TN, anyways) and I have yet to fill out a 1099 on them. The govt isn't going to shut your business down or fine you if you hire some kid and pay him 4.00 an hour to sweep the floors and pay him under the table.

My 16-year-old daughter would be happy to work for any wage, even free for the right job, just to get experience at a real place of business so that she can put it on her resume. Despite trying very hard, she cannot find a job at any wage. My 11-year-old son works for less than minimum wage 3 hours a week for a neighbor. He's happy as a clam, but I've had to explain to him why, technically, he's breaking the law.

Seriously though, if you're asking for "facts" to back up something that not only you backed a few posts ago (If I want to pay a kid 4.00 an hour to clean up my yard a few hours a week, what's going to stop me?) and is really just common sense, then I can see you're just arguing for the sake of argument and have no interest in using logic. My posts are for those with open minds.

I appreciate the fact that you agree minimum wage laws are broken frequently and that is a good thing. Remind me again why we have this law that you support breaking?

With your logic, we shouldn't have traffic laws either. People break those all of the time, but don't you somewhat agree that without them, the roads would be a lot less safe? And you are equating teenage worker (and let's face it, minimum wage was not created for a high-school student working part-time) with an adult worker with more responsiblities. It's not an apples to apples comparison. I find it hard to believe that your daughter cannot find a minimum wage job anywhere. I could drive her to any fast food restaraunt and I think they would be thriled to have her.

And you are equating teenage worker (and let's face it, minimum wage was not created for a high-school student working part-time) with an adult worker with more responsiblities.

I'm not equating it at all. I'm just grabbing at the low hanging fruit. There is no rational argument for a minimum wage for anybody under the age of 18...and your quote above seems to agree.

Now that we got that out of the way, if you want to address over 18 and throw out your "living wage" argument, then that's already been addressed in this thread. I believe it also causes unemployment and inflation, but at least there is a "socialist/spread the wealth/makes me feel good" argument that you can cling to.

John, shaking your pitchfork at corporations that offer benefits and misguided as you think that they are getting away tax free. I would say that corporations having to give benefits to remain competitive is costly compared to small business that are not required to have it. My brother consistently beats the big boys in a nicht market because they have too much overhead.

The argument may boil down like the tax the rich pitch fork sessions. Taxing the rich will actually only pull in so much money where taxing the 47% that don't pay income tax even a little bit will bring in much more money. It is called volume. I am not making an argument for or against minimum wage, just stating that a whole lot of people taking more adds up fast. You may can argue that many of the minimum wage jobs have been taken by resident aliens and that money gets shipped out of the country directly without being circulated in the local economy.

I'm not equating it at all. I'm just grabbing at the low hanging fruit. There is no rational argument for a minimum wage for anybody under the age of 18...and your quote above seems to agree.

Now that we got that out of the way, if you want to address over 18 and throw out your "living wage" argument, then that's already been addressed in this thread. I believe it also causes unemployment and inflation, but at least there is a "socialist/spread the wealth/makes me feel good" argument that you can cling to.

I don't believe your first paragraph is accurate. Of course there is a rational argument for minimum wage for everyone. Let's say politicians say "abolish minimum for anyone under 18". What about the kids that drop out because they have a kid or the kid works a couple of jobs to supplement his family's income. Is that cool with you? How long before you add more stipulations (i.e. move it to 21, you can't be in school, etc.)?

Minimum wage has been around through Republican and Democrat presidents. Funny, I never heard about any GOP pres. wanting to abolish minimum wage. I guess they were "socialists/spread the wealth supporters/want to feel good" kind of people?

Funny, I never heard about any GOP pres. wanting to abolish minimum wage. I guess they were "socialists/spread the wealth supporters/want to feel good" kind of people?

Ahh, the true partisan colors rear their head. You assume I'm a republican and don't like minimum wage just because democrats do. Lame and untrue. I don't care who if the person behind minimum wage is a dem, repub or other. It's still a "socialists/spread the wealth supporters/want to feel good" that hurts our economy, so I disagree with anyone that is behind it.

For the rare under 18 examples you cite above, seeing "living wage" argument from earlier. You think it's as simple as giving some people some money from some rich businesses that can certainly afford it and everybody is happy and feels good. You don't want to study the side effects of that kind of policy and I can't convince you otherwise.

"Minimum wage laws hurt everyone, but hurt minorities the most."
What a bunch of B.S.
Their study focuses on 16-to-24-year-old male high school dropouts, looks to me like an education, family, society, and welfare problem, and then when they commit a crime you can put them in that 50k a year Hotel paid by the taxpayers!
"The most anti-negro law on the books is the minimum wage law"
Milton Friedman
How about giving the high school graduates minimum wage and have no minimum wage for dropouts? Wouldn't that motivate them to graduate?
McDonald's has a hard time keeping their employees as it is, if they were paid Less, they would spend a lot more on training. Also, McDonald's has to compete with other restaurants so they can't always just increase prices. Knowing mcDonalds they would probably become more efficient.
Finally, minimum wage does Not effect the self-employed and people who are farmers can work for any wage they want, so minimum wage is irrelevant for them.

How about giving the high school graduates minimum wage and have no minimum wage for dropouts? Wouldn't that motivate them to graduate?

Mabye, if the goal of minimum wage was to increase the high school graduation rate, but I don't think that's what we are talking about. However, the side effect would be raising the unemployment rate on high school graduates and decreasing the unemployment rate on dropouts, so you're completely missing the point of what Friedman said.

Ahh, the true partisan colors rear their head. You assume I'm a republican and don't like minimum wage just because democrats do. Lame and untrue. I don't care who if the person behind minimum wage is a dem, repub or other. It's still a "socialists/spread the wealth supporters/want to feel good" that hurts our economy, so I disagree with anyone that is behind it.

For the rare under 18 examples you cite above, seeing "living wage" argument from earlier. You think it's as simple as giving some people some money from some rich businesses that can certainly afford it and everybody is happy and feels good. You don't want to study the side effects of that kind of policy and I can't convince you otherwise.

Minimum wage has been around since 1938, so how can you definitively say that it having it hurts/helps our economy? And I don't see why you result to insults as to imply that I am a person that has no clue how business works. Or as if I want to go after "evil business".

So if something has been around a long time there is no way to determine whether it is good or bad for the economy?

For you to say it's bad (or good) is speculative. Posting a opinion video from someone that takes your stance does not give you the ability to definitively say that it is bad for the economy. I can post an opinion video that says minimum wage is vital to the economy. Is this going to change your view?

So if something has been around a long time there is no way to determine whether it is good or bad for the economy?

Thats a pretty good sample size.

Quote:

Of course there is a rational argument for minimum wage for everyone. Let's say politicians say "abolish minimum for anyone under 18". What about the kids that drop out because they have a kid or the kid works a couple of jobs to supplement his family's income. Is that cool with you?

My biggest problem with this 18 year old idea is this.... if I am a Joe Schmoe who owns a burger joint I am going to hire 16-17 year old kids like crazy, pay them dick, and on their 18th birthday... you're fired. I think you would see this far too often and it would cause more problems that it was worth.

More commentary related to my 16 year old son..... He has "worked" off the books for years at a few different places, never being paid less than minimum wage, usually around $8-10 an hour. Worked his tail off in a warehouse job this Summer for $10 an hour, which was a far bigger money maker than his current job.

Maybe it is our local economy, but neither him nor any of his friends have had difficulty finding "on the books" work. Almost all of them work in retail or food services. He talked with the ice center about work, put in an application and was hired shortly thereafter. He does have a developed skill for the job and could be plugged in immediately. Only had to be trained on the cash register.

My position is this, I have no issue with the current rate minimum wage or there being a minimum wage. Just as I am fine with their being other laws a workplace must follow, re: safety, hours in a workweek ect.

What about a regionalized minimum wage based on some real COLA data. It would still have to be set pretty low in my opinion because it's not intended to support a family's lifestyle, it's intended to keep people from being taken advantage of. Or leave it to each state to determine it's own minimum wage. If you don't like what your state provides, either vote in new legislators, or move to a different state.

More commentary related to my 16 year old son..... He has "worked" off the books for years at a few different places

Through college I worked at my family's bar/restaurant where I grew up bar-tending a waiting tables at night .... Bar-tending I get $8.00/hr + tips (didn't have to claim any cash tips, just credit cards). My checks were worthless, the tips were where I made money.

They also had a safe-ride-home bus if you were too drunk to drive, or you could call to have it pick you up if you knew you were getting ****ty. The bus was free so people were encouraged to tip, they did not pay me to drive it, I just got all the tips.... under the table.

Days I would work with a friend who owned a lawn care / dock and boat lift removal company .... He was giving me $15/hr cash .... couldn't beat that with any other job.

EDIT:
I've never gotten paid minimum wage - even in high school, but I bet it would suck something fierce.

John, shaking your pitchfork at corporations that offer benefits and misguided as you think that they are getting away tax free. I would say that corporations having to give benefits to remain competitive is costly compared to small business that are not required to have it. My brother consistently beats the big boys in a nicht market because they have too much overhead.

Nothing in my post alluded to the taxes corp pay. And nothing in my post alluded to whether corps should or shouldn't provide benefits. I wasn't talking about corps not paying taxes. I was saying individuals not paying taxes on benefits is in reality the govt giving money to market sector that those benefits are directed at... i.e HI and Wall Street. If you meant that the govt is giving tax money to corps via Wall Street then OK, but I'm fairly sure that you didn't mean that.

My point about corps is that many like Apple for example are able to drain the economy through the trade deficit without being responsible for the consequences. $2B per year in the case of Apple.

Quote:

Originally Posted by deltahoosier

The argument may boil down like the tax the rich pitch fork sessions. Taxing the rich will actually only pull in so much money where taxing the 47% that don't pay income tax even a little bit will bring in much more money. It is called volume.

We could certainly let all the Bush tax cuts expire and I'm fine with that. But I think you want the govt to tax more at even lower on the scale. If it wasn't that the govt was already collecting 15% for that all that income when a guy like Romney is only paying 14% I might have some sympathy. But life has overhead, and when you are at the bottom of the scale the money just isn't there. How ironic when going to work has nondeductible related costs that workers get taxed higher than many investment income that has no related costs except maybe wear on the couch from sitting on your butt while earning it.

If a company wants to pay it and a worker wants to work for it, who is being taken advantage of? I love having an elitist government to tell me what's best for me and being so kind to inform me when I'm being taken advantage of, especially when they're telling me the alternative is unemployment. Again, thanks government!

I guess we should get rid of all non-paid internships too cuz those stupid college students that think they are gaining work experience to help them land a future job are really just being taken advantage of! Queue the music...here comes the government to save the day!!

One other point about not paying any income tax at the lowest level. When my daughter began working at minimum wage I lost an exemption for her on my taxes. IIRC at the time the level of losing the exemption was $3500 in earnings a year. Even though her taxes were minimal, I was making it up with higher taxes.

If a company wants to pay it and a worker wants to work for it, who is being taken advantage of? I love having an elitist government to tell me what's best for me and being so kind to inform me when I'm being taken advantage of, especially when they're telling me the alternative is unemployment. Again, thanks government!

I guess we should get rid of all non-paid internships too cuz those stupid college students that think they are gaining work experience to help them land a future job are really just being taken advantage of! Queue the music...here comes the government to save the day!!

How many college students get their foot in the door of a respective industry with internships? A three-month internship at Apple, MS, CBS, etc. looks pretty good on a resume and most of the times, results in a good-paying gig once the kid finishes his degree. Agreeing to sweep the floors at Wal-Mart for 50 cents an hour doesn't.

And if you want your daughter to be able to take a low-paying job and you have a problem with the "elitist government" and minimum wage, why not move to Mexico or Singapore. We see all of the lovely things that happen in those countries without a minimum wage. How everyone in the US wouldn't want to be like that is beyond me.

And if you want your daughter to be able to take a low-paying job and you have a problem with the "elitist government" and minimum wage, why not move to Mexico or Singapore. We see all of the lovely things that happen in those countries without a minimum wage. How everyone in the US wouldn't want to be like that is beyond me.

So if we remove the minimum wage, we will be just like Mexico and Singapore. Wow, somebody needs to tell their governments that you've narrowed down all their problems to a lack of minimum wage. After so many years of trying everything else, they'll be so happy to hear it's an easy fix.

So if we remove the minimum wage, we will be just like Mexico and Singapore. Wow, somebody needs to tell their governments that you've narrowed down all their problems to a lack of minimum wage. After so many years of trying everything else, they'll be so happy to hear it's an easy fix.

Why not? You seem to believe that we are socialists because of minimum wage.

If and when minimum wage goes up all it does is drives the price of everything else up with it. The people that have been working their whole lives at a career and have "peeked" do not get this same raise(they call it a cost of living raise, which is a small percent). If they want to do it fair then give everybody a 10% raise across the board. It doesn't make sense, raising minimum wage forces employers to increase costs which are absorbed by the consumer. The American dream starts at the bottom of the ladder not the top.